Good intentions and ICH-GCP: Trial conduct training needs to go beyond the ICH-GCP document and include the intention-to-treat principle

Abstract

Background: It is assumed investigators and statisticians fully understand the importance of avoiding missing outcomes and the intention-to-treat principle during design and analysis phases of a randomised controlled trial in order to obtain the most valuable and reliable results. However, many personnel undertaking day-to-day trial conduct and data collection commonly rely exclusively for guidance on the widely implemented, indeed regulated, International Conference on Harmonisation-Good Clinical Practice document as the guideline and standard for trial conduct.

Purpose: This article describes adverse consequences of omission of intention-to-treat principles from training for trial personnel and explores the need for training in addition to the International Conference on Harmonisation-Good Clinical Practice guideline document.

Methods: Data from the Breast Boost Study were used to illustrate a comparison of actual results, where vigilant senior investigators re-enforced intention-to-treat requirements throughout all aspects of trial conduct with results that could easily have occurred if study personnel did not understand the importance of intention-to-treat principles. Experience as a co-ordinating centre for an international trial (Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 08.06 Breast STARS) acted as an audit of data-management culture regarding intention-to-treat in Australia and New Zealand.

Results: Despite the Breast Boost Study exceeding planned accrual, it was demonstrated that the study, which found a statistically significant result, could have reported a negative or inconclusive result under the scenario of trial conduct personnel having lack of understanding of the importance of avoiding losses to follow-up. Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology 08.06 co-ordination experience verified that data-management culture in Australia and New Zealand does not adequately recognise intention-to-treat principles, and this is reflected in trial conduct.

Limitations: Trial data described are limited to two trials and in the Australian and New Zealand setting.

Conclusion: To be both scientifically and ethically valid, guidelines for trial conduct should include and stress the importance of the intention-to-treat principle and in particular avoiding missing outcomes. Our discussion highlights the vitally important role played by personnel involved in day-to-day trial conduct. Inclusion of scientific principles in guideline documents and/or training which goes beyond International Conference on Harmonisation-Good Clinical Practice to include intention-to-treat is essential to achieve robust research results. Related aspects of randomised trial consent and ethics are discussed.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00138814 NCT00887380.

Keywords: GCP; ITT; Intention-to-treat; clinical trials; follow-up; good clinical practice; guidelines; loss to follow-up; missing outcome; regulation.